Sunday Serenity Planet Earth Freshwater continues this Sunday.  In today’s episode we travel from icy Lake Baikal to the species rich Amazon river.  The footage of the Amazon river is some of the best of the series…

From December 7th through December 18th, 2009 world leaders will gather in Copenhagen, Denmark for the global Conference of the Parties [COP] on climate change known as COP 15.  It is our opportunity to finally come together and begin to address this global issue with one voice, as one people, as one species.  It is an important meeting that all of us should be paying attention to:  http://en.cop15.dk/

The United Nations has established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC].  “The Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change is the leading body for the assessment of climate change, established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic consequences“.  http://www.ipcc.ch/index.htm.  They have been at the global forefront of this issue and the IPCC is an excellent reference.

Addressing climate change is critical to our freshwater resources for the future.  US President Barak Obama, conservative media mogul Rupert Murdoch, former Vice-President Al Gore, and conservative talk show host Bill O’Reilly all agree that there is climate change and it’s a problem.  This is a human issue that doesn’t easily fit into any one political agenda.

For taking on the skeptics of climate change I defer to a business sector leader:  Allianz, the multinational financial services company has posted on their website a whole section devoted to climate change.  One particular section is devoted to “Taking on Climate Change Myths and Skeptics”.  These guys pull no punches, they don’t have to, they don’t have a general electorate to answer to, just their shareholders and every conservationist ought to send them a note of thanks for their involvement, commitment and vigor on the issue of climate change [ http://knowledge.allianz.com/en/contact/ and tell them I sent you!]  and every skeptic ought to reflect on the cost of denial and inaction.  It is, after all is said and done, in our own rational self-interest to take action even in the absence of 100% of scientific information.

Taking on Climate Change Myths and Skeptics

Stefan Rahmstorf, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Lead Author of the 4th IPCC Report is one of the world’s best known climate scientists and one of the most outspoken critics of climate change skeptics. Here he tackles the most common and pervasive climate change myths promoted by climate change deniers.

“I must say that from some quarters, the reaction against the idea of human-caused warming is very emotional, resulting in wild conspiracy theories and ad-hominem attacks against climate scientists.”

The scientific facts seem clear, climate change is happening and it is man-made. Still some people disagree. Why?

“In my experience, these people primarily do not like the consequences of the scientific findings: that we need to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.”

Are there any scientists left that deny that climate change is happening or man-made?

“Scientists yes, but they are almost never climate scientists. A very interesting survey of earth scientists by the University of Illinois recently found that 97 percent of those who publish original research in climate science agree that humans have caused significant global warming.  But the more you move away from climate science, going for example to meteorologists (who study weather rather than climate) or geologists, the more people are still skeptical.”

There are different degrees of denial and skepticism. Which is the most common and which is the most dangerous?

“One must make a distinction: many scientists from neighboring fields are skeptical in the sense that they are not sure, since they are not very familiar with the evidence. In fact, most climate scientists, including myself, were skeptical in this sense perhaps 15 or 20 years ago, and were gradually convinced by the overwhelming evidence. That’s healthy skepticism.

Quite something else are those individuals that actively go out to deny human-caused global warming in the media. This activity usually has a political background, and the arguments they present are generally aimed at uninformed lay people who are not familiar with the data. To knowledgeable people they are thoroughly unconvincing, often deceitful.”

 What are the most common positions taken by climate change deniers?

“We distinguish three main types. First, the “trend skeptics” who deny that there is any climate change. Second, the “attribution skeptics”, who accept that there is global warming but deny that humans cause it. Third, the “impact skeptics” who accept there is human-caused global warming but claim it is harmless.

Amongst the trend skeptics, the most popular argument last year was that there was no global warming over the past ten years. That happened to be the case because the last ten years then started with 1998, which was an exceptionally warm year due to an El Niño event (a natural climate oscillation in the tropical Pacific) in that year.

This argument is less popular this year, since the past ten years are now 1999 to 2008, and that period shows a strong warming trend simply because 1999 happened to be a relatively cold year.

For good reason, the shortest time span for which the IPCC report gives a trend is 25 years – in that way you don’t mix-up climate trends with short-term natural fluctuations. It is a standard, unscientific skeptic-argument to confuse people about the trend by pointing to short-term variations. This faulty argument is also made about the sea level trend.

The most popular “attribution skeptic” argument is that solar variations have caused global warming. That is clearly wrong since most of the global warming happened since the late 1970s, yet solar activity has gone down over this period. In fact, in the past two years solar output has been the weakest since the beginning of the satellite-based measurements that started in the 1970s. Hence, global warming has occurred despite the sun getting a little fainter, not because it got brighter.”

 How do people react when you challenge their beliefs?

“All we can do as scientists is to explain the scientific evidence soberly to the public. From some quarters, the reaction against the idea of human-caused warming is very emotional, resulting in wild conspiracy theories and personal attacks against climate scientists.

In fact, the very weakness of the skeptics’ arguments is a very good indication of how strong the evidence for human-caused warming is. If there were any valid counter-arguments, I am sure these people would have found them.”

 You have been very vocal in the debate with climate skeptics. What is your motivation?

“The reason is simple. I get a lot of queries from the public and the policy world about specific skeptics’ claims. And the doubts promoted by skeptics have a disproportionate influence on climate policy, delaying the required measures. This was especially clear for U.S. government policy during the Bush-era, but it is also true elsewhere.

These delays have meant that we are now running out of time. We need to turn the tide of rising emissions within the next ten years, and we need to reduce emissions globally at a very stiff rate until 2050: at about 2 percent a year if we start now, but already at about 6 percent a year if we wait another ten years.

After that, it becomes almost impossible to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius, the stated goal of over 100 countries. Had we started acting right after the Rio environment summit of 1992, when the Framework Convention on Climate Change was passed, we could have solved the problem at a leisurely pace of about a half percent reduction each year.”

 What can be done about the large majority that is aware of climate change, but not acting accordingly?

“People need to be better educated not just about what the problem is, but more importantly about what the solutions are, so they feel empowered to act. Many people are not well aware of where the biggest potential for emissions reductions is in their own household and lifestyle.

Take the case of a Hollywood celebrity turning back her car on the way to the airport, because she forgot to unplug her mobile phone charger. The extra car miles of course swamped those emissions from the idle charger, and don’t even mention the plane trip.

There is huge potential for savings by insulating your house and by using only the most efficient appliances on the market. And in terms of lifestyle, cutting down on air and car travel will be the biggest contribution many people can make.

Apart from these personal actions, many people are not well aware of the political solutions: for example that we could build an energy supply system over the next decades based primarily on renewable resources.  We can still contain the climate crisis, but we need to act decisively now. It is a race against time. As U.S. president Obama has rightly put it: “Delay is no longer an option.”

http://knowledge.allianz.com/en/globalissues/climate_change/global_warming_basics/rahmstorf_climate_sceptics.html

Commentary:  For those that remain skeptical I ask that we at least take out an insurance policy on this issue and use our amazing intelligence to innovate solutions to the “possibility” that there is something to all of this climate change controversy.  We have far more to lose by inaction than by creating new renewable clean energy sources. 

The United States has lost its place as a world leader on this issue and we are behind in being a leader in green technologies that is the economy of the future.  One of my all time favorite authors is Thomas L. Friedman and in his book “Hot, Flat and Crowded” he leads off the first chapter with a billboard sign in South Africa that Daimler put up to promote its Smart “forfour” compact car:

“German engineering, Swiss innovation, American nothing”

We’re the country that put a man on the moon.  Our LCROSS probe just discovered water on the moon.  I am a product of the Kennedy era where I hold firm in my belief that there is no problem we cannot solve if we have the collective political will to address.  I am an American patriot in my heart and I am pained that we have lost our leadership role in addressing global environmental issues.  I want America to re-earn her seat at the head of the global table and be a leader and partner in addressing climate change.  

It’s our duty as a leader and it’s our honor as a global partner.

Happy Sunday morning all…I want to welcome this week the following countries who’s readers have come on board: Venezuela, Cayman Islands, Aruba, Guyana, Suriname, Taiwan, Ethiopia, Kyrgyzstan, Sudan, Italy,  Antigua and Barbuda, Montserrat, Guadeloupe.  Fresh[water] ideas for a thirsty planet is now read in over 95 countries and on all continents except Antarctica [I know you have internet down there folks...].

Sunday Serenity Planet Earth Freshwater series continues today with its amazing and awe-inspiring footage.  Today’s episode features the wildebeest migrations of Africa, Lake Malawi, and introduction of Lake Baikal. 

Caution:  there is a scene of a crocodiles attacking wildebeasts…all part of the natural world but it might upset some people. 

About 12 miles off the coast of Maine near the mouth of Penobscot Bay an island rises out of the Atlantic like a great whale.  Monhegan Island is about a 1.7 miles long and .7 miles wide…a small fishing and artist community that today supports around 70 people year-round and too many “summer complaints” in the summer.  I grew up there as a “summer complaint” in our family’s home, built by my great-grandmother back in the 1920’s and it is here that I learned what island life has to teach us all. 

Living on an island makes one aware of your own “footprints on the beach”.  You pay attention to the water you need, the food you eat, the sewage you cause, the energy you use, the trash you generate, the noise you make and your own behavior because anonymity is not an option.  These are all valuable lessons that more of us should heed not only for our environment but for our society as well.  Living on an Island in Maine is a juxtaposition of American Yankee fiscal conservatism with moderate social allowances and a time-tested and honored wisdom of the intertwining of the environment and the economy.  It’s a higher evolved balance of human social attitudes which translates into behavior that while never perfect and always evolving is still a higher standard than I have found on most mainland communities.  In all my travels whatever self-description and uniqueness island people put on themselves–it’s still a familiar worldview that Islanders around the world share.  Which is why I want bring the whole concept of Climate Change back to islands and freshwater. 

Long before the sea levels rise to overtake and flood low-lying islands, such as those in Oceania or in the Caribbean basin, the rising sea will intrude upon the freshwater resources of these islands–all islands low or tall.  It begins with the physics of water:

• Ocean saltwater weighs about 8.55 lbs per gallon [metric conversion:  3.878 kilograms per 3.785 liters];
• Freshwater weighs about 8.34 lbs per gallon [metric conversion:  3.783 kilograms per 3.785 liters].

So freshwater weighs less than saltwater…common sense since the freshwater doesn’t have all those salts nor as many minerals.  On an island, rainwater percolates through the bedrock and forms a “freshwater lens” that literally floats on top of saltwater.

This freshwater is also influenced by tidal changes and by storm surges.  As the ocean rises it pushes up the freshwater lens.  As long as your well is dug very carefully you will not pierce the lens and extract saltwater.  Here’s video of a simulation of a freshwater lens and in the author’s words: 

“This movie shows the development of a fresh water lens over a 2-year period beneath a small island surrounded by tidal flats subject to a semi-diurnal tide. Red colors indicate saline water, blue colors indicate fresh groundwater. The blue prism surrounding island represent the surface water in the lagoon. Groundwater recharge only occurs in the center of the island.” [no audio in the simulation video]

As you can see the freshwater lens on an island is a dynamic phenomenon.  Pulling water out of the lens requires great sensitivity to precipitation and recharge, sea levels, storm surges and pollution.  Once the lens is polluted you don’t have other choices like people on the mainland have.

Freshwater is an issue of national security for island nations.  In the Bahamas, the residents and tourists of the capital city Nassau need approximately 8.1 million gallons of freshwater everyday.  The government must barge over approximately 4.33 million gallons everyday from the neighboring island of Andros because Nassau [island of New Providence] doesn’t have enough water to satisfy the demand.  If the freshwater lens of Andros becomes compromised the inhabitants and tourists, upon which the economy of the Bahamas is so dependent upon, will find themselves with half their freshwater cut off.  That’s not enough to sustain the population.

Here’s some information from the Bahamian Water and Sewage Corporation at:  http://www.wsc.com.bs/Information.asp

“All freshwater in the Bahamas is only available as groundwater, which comes about as a result of rainfall. The freshwater resources occur as concave lens-shaped bodies:   

90% of all freshwater lenses are within five feet of the surface.  Freshwater resources occur as three-dimensional lens-shaped bodies, which overlies brackish and saline waters at depth.  The size, shape and orientation of the island, the subsurface, geology and the amount of rainfall control the shape, size and thickness of freshwater bodies.  The only source of drinking and irrigation water is from groundwater lenses, which float on brackish water due to differing densities.  Due to the shallow depth of the freshwater lenses, the resources are vulnerable to several environmental risks.  Additionally, over-extraction of groundwater lenses is an ongoing concern. 

In order to meet the water requirements of a growing population on the island of New Providence, the water lenses have been used beyond their sustainable or safe yields.  This has caused a mixing of fresh and brackish lenses resulting in a steady rise in the salinity of the water supplied.”

On the other side of the globe the islands of the South Pacific face water security issues as well.  Here’s an excellent primer from Islands First:  http://www.islandsfirst.org/

“An important problem already affecting numerous coastal areas including small islands is salt water infiltration in soils or salinisation, especially on atoll countries such as Tuvalu, Maldives, or Kiribati.  Atolls get their freshwater supplies from rainfall or groundwater (rainfall filtered in the ground). Freshwater is lighter than salt water; a lens is formed under the atoll with freshwater on top. This reserve of freshwater is vulnerable to decrease in rainfall (as the lens cannot replenish) and over drilling which can contaminate the lens water with brackish water.

As projections from the IPCC have shown, there is strong evidence that water resources and distribution of rainfall on small islands will be compromised with climate change. In Kiribati, for instance, a 10% reduction in average rainfall by 2050 would lead to a 20% reduction in the size of the freshwater lens. In addition, increase frequency of extreme weather events, sea level rise and resulting land loss, are likely to increase the stress on freshwater lens on atolls. For example, studies in Tarawa, Kiribati, demonstrated that a 50 cm rise in sea level accompanied by a reduction in rainfall of 25% would reduce the freshwater lens by 65%.

These negative impacts of climate change cumulated with population increase put the availability of fresh water resources at risk. Water quality is likely to be degraded by salt water infiltration. This could lead to health problems related to the scarcity of freshwater, and to the spread of water born diseases. As freshwater runs scarce, life on islands will be more difficult to sustain. The inhabitants of the Carteret islands in Papua New Guinea are currently suffering increase water shortage and rely on coconut water since average precipitations have decreased and their freshwater supplies have been contaminated by saltwater infiltration.

Salt water infiltration has also severe adverse impacts on agricultural practices. As salt water infiltrates the aquifers and soils, many salt intolerant traditional crops, such as taro or pulaka, die from salt contamination, which affects the traditional diet of islanders. For example, across the Pacific, taro crop is a fundamental element of islanders’ diet. Because of salt contamination in soils, many island communities have been forced to relocate their plantations further inland or in higher grounds. For atolls, which culminate at less than 5 meters above sea level, the situation is even more precarious: some island communities, in Tuvalu for instance, have started growing traditional crops in tin cans since they are unable to relocate to higher grounds…

Fresh water is lighter than salt water. Therefore, fresh water “floats” on top of salt water. This principle becomes extremely important when considering the drilling of a well in order to tap into the ground water of any island. The weight of the rain water that percolates into the ground depresses the salt water beneath it forming a profile that has the appearance of a lens. This is called the Ghyben-Herzberg lens. The principle of this relationship was discovered independently by a Dutch scientist named Baden-Ghyben and a German scientist named Herzberg.

The underground boundary that separates the fresh water layer from the salt water is not a sharp boundary line. In reality, this boundary is a transition zone of brackish water (fresh/salt mixture). This is caused by seasonal fluctuations in rainfall, tidal action, and the amount of water being withdrawn either by humans or by natural discharge.”

Islands teach us about resource management in an “in your face” style.  Managing an islands resources in a sustainable manner is critical for survival and for economic development…and nothing is more critical than freshwater.  Pressures of irrigating crops for food along with freshwater needs for hydration and hygiene are all wrapped up in a world where you are dependent upon a fragile freshwater lens sitting on top of saltwater.  

Changes to the hydrologic cycle, like cyclonic events, are predicted to get stronger as a result of climate change and sea levels are already rising.  The Bahamas experienced this with Hurricane Katrina…Andros [Arawak Cay] pumped salt water for a few days until the sea level subsided and the freshwater lens settled back down to the well points. These are all real challenges to islands and island nations. They hold lessons for those of us on the mainland as these issues, while magnified by the nature of island living, are our issues as well.

When the wells run salt there is nowhere to go.  It’s like being on a ship at sea and the ship catches fire…there’s nowhere to go…you have to deal with it and do it quickly.  Otherwise you abandon ship or in this case de-populate in a planned manner, die from dehydration, or succumb to chaos in a desperate bid for survival when the veneer of civility is stripped off us:  no water…no civility…no civilization 

It is our responsibility to plan ahead, conserve our resources and come up with some fresh[water] ideas for a thirsty planet or islands in this case. 

Pay attention to the islands.  They are the Miner’s Canary. 

But for now, as winter sets into the northern hemisphere, for all my friends in the Commonwealth of the Bahamas we all still know ”…it’s better in the Bahamas…” 

[P.S. for those in the South Pacific and feel it is better there just send a plane ticket and I'll be happy to come verify that--preferably around January or February up here in Maine...I know, shameless appeal for a free trip to the tropics]

Welcome new readers in Uruguay, Kiribati, Cambodia and Lesotho!  Our Planet Earth series continues for your Sunday Serenity.   Salmon on the menu for some lucky grizzly bears, footage of the Grand Canyon and the Colorado River, river otters of India [strength in numbers!], and the Moro River of East Africa…all amazing footage:

Since the mid to late 1800’s sea levels have been very slowly rising…about 1 cm a year which is so small who would notice?  It’s now been about a century and some change and the rate of rising is starting to accelerate to about 2 cm a year. The tiny changes over the years are becoming noticeable.  Sea levels are rising and we are learning that in the last decade alone the rate is up to about 3cm a year.

The threat of rising sea levels to our coastal cities is being felt around the world such as the  magnificent historical city of Venice, Italy…a place on my “bucket list” [the list of things you want to see and do before you die or "kick the bucket" in American slang].  Poor Venice has a double whammy of both slowly sinking as a result of its own weight on the barrier islands it was constructed upon and a rising Adriatic Sea.  Venice is not alone..more than half of the world’s population lives within 60 Kilometers [36 miles] of the coast and the effects of a rising sea and retreating coastline is a serious issue for all of us.  I’m not going to be focusing on coastal effects here, instead this post is the warm up to the issue of freshwater and island nations.  As you’ve hopefully read in my previous posts I believe that islands hold lessons for the rest of us on the mainlands.  Islands are the “Miner’s Canary” for us and when island nations start running into issues, in this case sea levels and freshwater, we need to pay attention.

You may have seen articles in magazines such as National Geographic on small island nations suffering from sea level rise.   Island nations like Tuvalu, The Maldives, Kiribati, Vanuatu are all feeling the effects of rising sea levels.  It may seem like a marginally interesting or somewhat important issue when something is so far away, it can be hard to feel it and understand its importance to your own world.  But these islands are the harbingers of what’s to come for all of us and we ignore their plight at our own peril.  An organization of these small islands nations called Islands First has an excellent website and is a treasure trove of information on the issues facing these islands:  http://www.islandsfirst.org/

One of my favorite authors is Sir Laurens van der Post and he writes hauntingly beautiful and insightful novels about his life in South Africa.  In his book, “A Story Like the Wind” he writes about geo-political events that effect his characters on the edges of the remote Kalahari desert.  He says of these events, “they are like the wind, they come from a far off place but we feel them here”.  Here is another story like the wind…Kiribati:

…A  small island nation whose government is literally planning for its demise, just like Vanuatu or Tuvalu or the other low-lying atoll island nations of the South Pacific:

There are a couple of factors contributing to sea level rise:  Thermal expansion of the oceans due to warming of the waters, melting glaciers and loss of sea ice.  The Climate Institute has this explanation on this issue and I’ve embedded a NASA video below that presents the information quite nicely:

From the Climate Institute [edited for length] at www.climate.org

Most of the world’s coastal cities were established during the last few millennia, a period when global sea level has been near constant. Since the mid-19th century, sea level has been rising, likely primarily as a result of human-induced climate change. During the 20th century, sea level rose about 15-20 centimeters (roughly 1.5 to 2.0 mm/year), with the rate at the end of the century greater than over the early part of the century. Satellite measurements taken over the past decade, however, indicate that the rate of increase has jumped to about 3.1 mm/year, which is significantly higher than the average rate for the 20th century. Projections suggest that the rate of sea level rise is likely to increase during the 21st century, although there is considerable controversy about the likely size of the increase.

…It should be understood that the melting back of sea ice (e.g., in the Arctic and the floating ice shelves) will not directly contribute to sea level rise because this ice is already floating on the ocean (and so already displacing its mass of water). However, the melting back of this ice can lead to indirect contributions on sea level. For example, the melting back of sea ice leads to a reduction in albedo (surface reflectivity) and allows for greater absorption of solar radiation. More solar radiation being absorbed will accelerate warming, thus increasing the melting back of snow and ice on land. In addition, ongoing break up of the floating ice shelves will allow a faster flow of ice on land into the oceans, thereby providing an additional contribution to sea level rise.

There are three major processes by which human-induced climate change directly affects sea level. First, like air and other fluids, water expands as its temperature increases (i.e., its density goes down as temperature rises). As climate change increases ocean temperatures, initially at the surface and over centuries at depth, the water will expand, contributing to sea level rise due to thermal expansion. Thermal expansion is likely to have contributed to about 2.5 cm of sea level rise during the second half of the 20th century, with the rate of rise due to this term having increased to about 3 times this rate during the early 21st century. Because this contribution to sea level rise depends mainly on the temperature of the ocean, projecting the increase in ocean temperatures provides an estimate of future growth. Over the 21st century, the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment projected that thermal expansion will lead to sea level rise of about 17-28 cm (plus or minus about 50%). That this estimate is less than would occur from a linear extrapolation of the rate during the first decade of the 21st century when all model projections indicate ongoing ocean warming has led to concerns that the IPCC estimate may be too low.

A second, and less certain, contributor to sea level rise is the melting of glaciers and ice caps. IPCC’s Fourth Assessment estimated that, during the second half of the 20th century, melting of mountain glaciers and ice caps led to about a 2.5 cm rise in sea level. This is a higher amount than was caused by the loss of ice from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, which added about 1 cm to the sea level. For the 21st century, IPCC’s Fourth Assessment projected that melting of glaciers and ice caps will contribute roughly 10-12 cm to sea level rise, with an uncertainty of roughly a third. This would represent a melting of roughly a quarter of the total amount of ice tied up in mountain glaciers and small ice caps.

The third process that can cause sea level to rise is the loss of ice mass from Greenland and Antarctica. Were all the ice on Greenland to melt, a process that would likely take many centuries to millennia, sea level would go up by roughly 7 meters. The West Antarctic ice sheet holds about 5 m of sea level equivalent and is particularly vulnerable as much of it is grounded below sea level; the East Antarctic ice sheet, which is less vulnerable, holds about 55 m of sea level equivalent. The models used to estimate potential changes in ice mass are, so far, only capable of estimating the changes in mass due to surface processes leading to evaporation/sublimation and snowfall and conversion to ice. In summarizing the results of model simulations for the 21st century, IPCC reported that the central estimates projected that Greenland would induce about a 2 cm rise in sea level whereas Antarctica would, because of increased snow accumulation, induce about a 2 cm fall in sea level. That there are likely to be problems with these estimates, however, has become clear with recent satellite observations, which indicate that both Greenland and Antarctica are currently losing ice mass, and we are only in the first decade of a century that is projected to become much warmer over its course.

While there are obviously many challenges to projecting future sea level rise, even a seemingly small increase in sea level can have a dramatic impact on many coastal environments. Over 600 million people live in coastal areas that are less than 10 meters above sea level, and two-thirds of the world’s cities that have populations over five million are located in these at-risk areas. With sea level projected to rise at an accelerated rate for at least several centuries, very large numbers of people in vulnerable locations are going to be forced to relocate. 

…Unfortunately, many of the nations that are most vulnerable to sea level rise do not have the resources to prepare for it. Low-lying coastal regions in developing countries such as Bangladesh, Vietnam, India, and China have especially large populations living in at-risk coastal areas such as deltas, where river systems enter the ocean. Both large island nations such as the Philippines and Indonesia and small ones such as Tuvalu and Vanuatu are at severe risk because they do not have enough land at higher elevations to support displaced coastal populations. Another possibility for some island nations is the danger of losing their fresh-water supplies as sea level rise pushes saltwater into their aquifers. For these reasons, those living on several small island nations (including the Maldives in the Indian Ocean and the Marshall Islands in the Pacific) could be forced to evacuate over the 21st century.

 

Sea level rise can effect the very existence of an island nation, but before it floods over these islands there are other more insidious effects of sea level rise and an island’s freshwater resources are a “Miner’s Canary” of the larger climatic issue.  It presents a clear and present threat to the population long before the waves come over the beach. 

Next post: islands and freshwater

The Planet Earth series features amazing photography of our natural world.  One of the series was on freshwater and I have assembled some short videos from that series courtesy of YouTube that I’ll be featuring over the next few Sunday’s;

The footage is simply stunning and inspiring though I will say the 6′ long Japanese freshwater salamander has me putting a trip to a Japanese mountain stream on the backburner of things I want to do…  So kick back on your Sunday morning and enjoy! 

I have seen many glaciers and they are truly impressive in their size, silent strength and ability to literally change landscapes. I’ve seen them in the Rockies, the Alps, Iceland, flying over Greenland, and most recently in Alaska where, like the Great Land itself, they make them big! 

But perhaps nothing has ever taken my breath away than the snowpack and glacier of Mount Kilimanjaro.  Rising out of the Serengeti Plain alone in its majesty Mt. Kilimanjaro is a sleeping volcano and its sight fills the landscape.   It is even more impressive and awe-inspiring in person than any picture can do justice to.  Ever since I had read Ernest Hemingway’s “Snows of Kilimanjaro” the mountain has held for me the lure of the exotic, the impressiveness of its permanence, and seemingly improbable contrast of its snow-capped peak surrounded by the arid equatorial plains and wildlife of the Serengeti.

But the snows of Kilimanjaro and glacier have been retreating.  Scientists believe it is a direct result of global warming, not necessarily from rising temperatures at the summit but in changes to the hydrologic cycle and precipitation in East Africa and the Indian Ocean.  The loss of water from seasonal snow melt with its metered out melting holds dire consequences for those living in and around the arid iconic landscape of the Serengeti.

Worldwide we are losing glaciers and ice sheets at rates we have never seen before.  These glaciers and their snowpack with their seasonal cycle of melting and accrual are important sources of freshwater for the environment’s that they are in.  In addition to the water they provide for humans, the amount and timing of water in the streams in the spring run-off has major implications for the spawning cycle of many fish species.

As you have read in earlier posts the world’s glaciers and ice sheets hold about 75% of the world’s freshwater.  Greenland and Antarctica hold the greatest amount of freshwater in their ice sheets and glaciers and their melting is cause for concern of rising sea levels.

The melting of sea ice does not appreciably add to sea level rise as the volume of the frozen freshwater is already in the ocean…glaciers melting over land, especially in Greenland, do contribute to sea level rise.  Sea ice and glacier melting causes a loss of our global reflective surface from the white ice known as “albedo”.  The loss of this surface reflectivity allows for more solar radiation absorption by the newly exposed land and ocean and contributes to more warming and melting.  Not good.

There are a number of stunning videos on Greenland’s loss of glaciers on YouTube that I recommend you surf.  Here is a video on the Greenland deglaciation done by a BBC crew at a NASA research site:

The Climate Institute at  www.climate.org provides a good primer for understanding deglaciation and sea ice melting:

“One of the most pronounced effects of climate change has been melting of masses of ice around the world. Glaciers and ice sheets are large, slow-moving assemblages of ice that cover about 10% of the world’s land area and exist on every continent except Australia. They are the world’s largest reservoir of fresh water, holding approximately 75%.

Over the past century, most of the world’s mountain glaciers and the ice sheets in both Greenland and Antarctica have lost mass. Retreat of this ice occurs when the mass balance (the difference between accumulation of ice in the winter versus ablation or melting in the summer) is negative such that more ice melts each year than is replaced. By affecting the temperature and precipitation of a particular area, both of which are key factors in the ability of a glacier to replenish its volume of ice, climate change affects the mass balance of glaciers and ice sheets. When the temperature exceeds a particular level or warm temperatures last for a long enough period, and/or there is insufficient precipitation, glaciers and ice sheets will lose mass.

One of the best-documented examples of glacial retreat has been on Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa. It is the tallest peak on the continent, and so, despite being located in the tropics, it is high enough so that glacial ice has been present for at least many centuries. However, over the past century, the volume of Mount Kilimanjaro’s glacial ice has decreased by about 80%. If this rate of loss continues, its glaciers will likely disappear within the next decade. Similar glacial meltbacks are occurring in Alaska, the Himalayas, and the Andes.

When researching glacial melting, scientists must consider not only how much ice is being lost, but also how quickly. Recent studies show that the movement of ice towards the ocean from both of the major ice sheets has increased significantly. As the speed increases, the ice streams flow more rapidly into the ocean, too quickly to be replenished by snowfall near their heads. The speed of movement of some of the ice streams draining the Greenland Ice Sheet, for example, has doubled in just a few years. Using various methods to estimate how much ice is being lost (such as creating a ‘before and after’ image of the ice sheet to estimate the change in shape and therefore volume, or using satellites to ‘weigh’ the ice sheet by computing its gravitational pull), scientists have discovered that the mass balance of the Greenland Ice Sheet has become negative in the past few years. Estimates put the net loss of ice at anywhere between 82 and 224 cubic kilometers per year. 

In Antarctica, recent estimates show a sharp contrast between what is occurring in the East and West Antarctic Ice Sheets. The acceleration of ice loss from the West Antarctic Ice Sheet has doubled in recent years, which is similar to what has happened in Greenland. In West Antarctica, as well as in Greenland, the main reason for this increase is the quickening pace at which glacial streams are flowing into the ocean. Scientists estimate the loss of ice from the West Antarctic ice sheet to be from 47 to 148 cubic kilometers per year. On the other hand, recent measurements indicate that the East Antarctic ice sheet (which is much larger than the West) is gaining mass because of increased precipitation. However, it must be noted that this gain in mass by the East Antarctic ice sheet is nowhere near equal to the loss from the West Antarctic ice sheet.  Therefore, the mass balance of the entire Antarctic Ice Sheet is negative.

 

The melting back of the glaciers and ice sheets has two major impacts. First, areas that rely on the runoff from the melting of mountain glaciers are very likely to experience severe water shortages as the glaciers disappear. Less runoff will lead to a reduced capability to irrigate crops as freshwater dams and reservoirs more frequently go dry. Water shortages could be especially severe in parts of South America and Central Asia, where summertime runoff from the Andes and the Himalayas, respectively, is crucial for fresh water supplies. Also, in areas of North America and Europe, glacial runoff is used to power hydroelectric plants, sustain fish runs and irrigate crops as well as to supply the needs of large metropolitan areas. As the volume of runoff decreases, then the energy, urban, and agricultural infrastructures of such locations are likely to be stressed.  In addition, the melting of glaciers and ice sheets adds water to the oceans, contributing to sea level rise…”

 Commentary:  In Ernest Hemingway’s book, “The Snows of Kilimanjaro” there is a brief reference at the beginning of the novel about the presence of a frozen leopard’s carcass near the summit of Kilimanjaro.  What the Leopard was doing at such an altitude and why it was there is not explained but it becomes a focal point of Hemingway’s use of symbolism.

In the story there are two animals used by Hemingway to symbolize our own life challenges between the black and hollow eyes of death [the hyena] and a passionate strong graceful life [Leopard].  Hemingway writes what he knows like all great writers.  When I was in East Africa at the foot of Kilimanjaro I saw hyenas at night and when I flashed a light on them their eyes never reflected back the light like other creatures.  Black hollow eyes.  It was haunting.  One morning while camped out in the Serengeti a leopard attacked and ate a baboon in a tree right over my tent.  Scared the hell out me…the leopard was so graceful and rippled with such strength. 

In the book Hemingway says the name of Kilimanjaro means “House of God”.  The symbolism of the leopard guarding the ”House of God” finds its symbolic inspiration in the leopard that guards Mount Purgatory in Dante’s Divine Comedy. 

Before us today are the retreating snows of Kilimanjaro as well as retreating glaciers and polar ice sheets.  I can’t help but wonder if the Polar Bear is the arctic equivalent of the Leopard of Kilimanjaro reminding us as the guardian of the “House of God” that before us is a choice of paths:  Paradisio or Inferno. 

 

…We are in our own collective global Purgatory and our actions will decide our future path…

next post:  rising sea levels, freshwater, and small island nations…

As you know from a previous post, the hydrologic cycle is the engine of the world’s freshwater.  It creates freshwater and moves it around the globe, but it doesn’t distribute it equally nor does it deliver the water to where we humans are in the quantities we need.

The effect on the hydrologic cycle from climate change is the introduction of more “energy” into the system because of warmer temperatures which leads to more moisture being put into the cycle through evaporation and transpiration.  Climate change “turbo-charges” the hydrologic cycle….on the face of it that seems like that would be a good thing.  The world’s freshwater factory is creating more freshwater for our rapidly expanding world population!  Unfortunately it’s not as simple as that… 

With all that new energy in the hydrologic cycle we also “turbocharge” our precipitation events with the wet get wetter and the dry get drier…Here’s a video from the US National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] that explains this very well:

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] and the United States Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] are excellent resources on the issue of climate change.  The IPCC is a global consortium of the worlds leading scientists and experts on climate change.  I’ve posted links on the right hand column of this blog for future reference. 

Here is some information on climate change and freshwater from the EPA: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/water/index.html

“Water Resources:  All regions of the world show an overall net negative impact of climate change on water resources and freshwater ecosystems. Areas in which runoff is projected to decline are likely to face a reduction in the value of the services provided by water resources. The beneficial impacts of increased annual runoff in other areas are likely to be tempered in some areas by negative effects of increased precipitation variability and seasonal runoff shifts on water supply, water quality and flood risks (IPCC, 2007).

The future effects of climate change on water resources in the U.S. and other parts of the world will depend on trends in both climatic and non-climatic factors. Evaluating these impacts is challenging because water availability, quality and streamflow are sensitive to changes in temperature and precipitation. Other important factors include increased demand for water caused by population growth, changes in the economy, development of new technologies, changes in watershed characteristics and water management decisions.

Water Availability:  An increase in net solar radiation or temperature will effectively speed up the processes within [the hydrologic] cycle (evaporation, condensation, precipitation, etc).  Due to complex interactions of changes in the hydrologic cycle with global circulation patterns and local weather patterns, an increase in energy in the hydrologic cycle does not necessarily translate into an increase in precipitation in all geographic regions.  It is difficult to predict future changes in regional precipitation patterns. Predicting regional changes in streamflow and groundwater recharge due to climate change also remains challenging, particularly because of the uncertainty in regional projections of how precipitation may change (IPCC, 2007).

Changes in temperature, precipitation patterns and snowmelt can have impacts on water availability. Temperature is predicted to rise in most areas, but is generally expected to increase more in inland areas and at higher latitudes. Higher temperatures will increase loss of water through evaporation. The net impact on water supplies will depend on changes in precipitation (including changes in the total amount, form, and seasonal timing of precipitation). Generally speaking, in areas where precipitation increases sufficiently, net water supplies may not be affected or they may even increase. In other areas where precipitation remains the same or decreases, net water supplies would decrease. Where water supplies decrease, there is also likely to be an increase in demand, which could be particularly significant for agriculture (the largest consumer of water) and also for municipal, industrial and other uses.

Increases in temperature can affect the amount and duration of snow cover which, in turn, can affect timing of streamflow. Glaciers are expected to continue retreating, and many small glaciers may disappear entirely. Peak streamflow may move from late spring to early spring/late winter in those areas where snowpack is important in determining water availability. Changes in streamflow have important implications for water and flood management, irrigation, and planning. If supplies are reduced, off-stream users of water such as irrigated agriculture and in-stream users such as hydropower, fisheries, recreation and navigation, could be most directly affected (IPCC, 2007)….

…Flood magnitudes and frequencies will very likely increase in most regions — mainly a result of increased precipitation intensity and variability — and increasing temperatures are expected to intensify the climate’s hydrologic cycle and melt snowpacks more rapidly (IPCC, 2007). Flooding can affect water quality, as large volumes of water can transport contaminants into water bodies and also overload storm and wastewater systems.

Higher temperatures, particularly in the summer, earlier snowmelt, and potential decreases in summer precipitation could increase risk of drought. The frequency and intensity of floods and droughts could increase, even in the same areas.

Sea level rise may also affect freshwater quality by increasing the salinity of coastal rivers and bays and causing saltwater intrusion, movement of saline water into fresh ground water resources in coastal regions”

Commentary:  The more one knows about climate change, even with a skeptical eye, the more informed our civil discourse on what action[s] we should be taking becomes.  We may debate the severity and extent of change it may have in all of our lives but it demands our attention and our action.  As you read in the previous post, former skeptics and very conservative people are acknowledging the science is becoming more and more compelling. 

I was a member and former Chairman of the United States Federal Invasive Species Advisory Committee [ISAC] under the Bush Administration.  We all know that the Bush Administration fought the notion of climate change for most of the two terms [8 years] Bush was in office.  We saw this firsthand on the ISAC and the parade of political appointees who poo-poo’ed the notion of climate change, and if there was climate change then Man wasn’t responsible, and if Man was responsible then we had no obligation to do anything about it.   I can also testify firsthand that in the last 18 months of the Administration there was a turnaround in attitude towards climate change.  It was quiet and without fanfare, perhaps to “save face”, but it was real.  Too late and too little for any meaningful policy changes but Executive Branch professionals were able to voice their concerns without fear of political backlash.

The mounting scientific evidence was convincing and many die-hard skeptics, many of whom had a political agenda to protect, did what any reasonable person does when faced with new information–they changed their mind.  Some still fight the growing global evidence…there are some people out there who still think the world is flat, there was no holocaust, and that the moon landing was done in a movie set.  In the words of my kids:  whatever… [usually said to me with a LOT more attitude...].

We humans are reluctant to accept anything new without questioning it.  We’re a skeptical bunch for the most part and that’s a healthy survival trait that has been ingrained in us from the ages [such as being skeptical that one can telepathically communicate with a wild grizzly bear is healthy skepticism].  But survival is about adaptation to a constantly changing environment and we are in a state of constant change in this world and in our own personal lives.  As new information becomes apparent to us we evolve our thinking, our attitudes and our behavior…those that do survive, those that don’t do not.

We must evolve our thinking on freshwater because:

no water…no civility…no civilization

In the next couple of posts we’ll look at retreating sea ice, melting glaciers, thermal expansion of the oceans and rising sea levels and what that means for freshwater…especially for small island nations…

Today is Saturday, October 24th and Sunday Serenity is going up a day early in support of International Day of Climate Action organized by 350.0rg [http://www.350.0rg].  It’s time for us all to get on the same team and address this issue because it has a direct impact on our global freshwater issues…

I want to welcome Panama, New Zealand, Oman, Indonesia, Albania, Kazakhstan [I knew I'd play in the "Stan's" sooner or later!], Morocco, and Guatemala.  Thank you for joining our global community of engaged and caring people.   This song is for all my readers in over 77 countries worldwide…

Playing For Change [ www.playingforchange.com ] is a very cool idea of having musicians from all over the world playing a song together.  I had another song picked out for today but this song speaks for itself…

“It’s time for the world to unite as a Human race”